• No and No.

Simultaneity doesn't deal with single events (nothing in relativity suggests individual space-time events are frame-dependent, that would be absurd), it deals with two or more separate events, and what space-time coordinates they occur at. While both spatial and temporal separation are frame dependent, the space-time interval ∆s^2=-c∆t^2+∆r^2 is not.

Simultaneity means a set of events﻿ occur at the same time. Time itself is a dimension, though one different from spatial dimensions.

• The question is - do you think that there is a single event that looks different from different perspectives; or that the event actually changes, depending on the observer?

If it's the latter - it seems like a belief to me.

Also - do you think that "time" and "simultaneity" are the same thing?﻿

• Yes, but synchronize them to each other in what frame of reference? The synchronicity of the clocks is frame-dependent.

Two events can be specified by﻿ their space-time coordinates. Though there is an invariant quantity relating coordinates between different frames, the actual values of the coordinates depend on the frame of reference. Only in one frame can two events at different coordinates have the same time coordinate, thus being "simultaneous." Therefore, simultaneity is relative.

• They don't need to be synchronize﻿ in both frames; only to each other.

• The constant speed of light is exactly why this has to happen, actually. Ground observer sees﻿ the train observer moving away from the back bolt and toward the front one. This means in order for the light from each bolt to reach her at the same time, the light from the back bolt would have to be travelling faster than the light from the front one.

For a constant speed of light, the light from each bolt must reach her at different times, and so she must conclude they stuck at different times.

• it is imposible to synchronize the clocks in both frames. If they are synchronous in one frame, they will be unsynchronized in the other.

With relativity, "who's doing the moving" is irrelevant, as all motion﻿ is relative. What matters is who's frame the clocks are synchronized with, since they cannot be synchronized with both. The point of all this is that two events that one observer sees as simultaneous, may not be simultaneous for another observer

• Suppose one observer concludes that The Big Bang and "Event X" occurred simultaneously, while another observer may conclude that "Event X" occurred after/before the Big Bang... doesn't this bring up multiple questions?? Or is it just because this falls under Special Relativity and I am missing something from General﻿ Relativity? (Which I am unfamiliar with)

• this video dosnt make any sense albert Einstein proved that anything moving under the speed of light will get passed by a light beam at the full speed of light for example a race car at 200 mph and a person standing still will get passed at the full 186000 miles per second the race cars speed means absolutely﻿ nothing so the speed of the train means nothing on a light speed perspective so they would both see the lightning bolts hit the train simultaneously and shafiq your a nobody quit trolling

• You are the most ignorant and arrogant person I have ever seen on Youtube. Beware, that's a really competitive title, so congratulations.﻿